This would be helpful if you, Carrol and others weren't overestimating the list populations' inability to understand what the interests of US leaders and their backers are. Many here are also capable of making finer distinctions that "us and them" which are important in a way that does not take away from their ability to deliver a clear and mobilizing and effective message.
The rest of your post wasn't helpful, since it served no observable purpose but to stoke hatred. Considering who you want us to hate, I'd have no problem with the tone, except that the more hatred exists, the more likely minorities are to start doing morally questionable and politically stupid things. Case in point: terrorism itself.
One question about terrorism is, how attention should be paid to US/imperialism/etc., and how much should be paid to people who are more interested in stirring anger and hatred than debating and planning the most effective methods of protest, and how many people who would ideally like different methods of protest obligingly smooth their criticisms of the often self-interested hate-mongerers so as not to seem too weak against them.
I believe, for example, that if the Al Aqsa intifada had gone as it has, except minus the suicide bombings, the Palestinians would be in a better position now than they are, and (for better or worse) this war would not be happening (yet?). This is not to say that things could have gone down differently with ease, or at all, perhaps. But western radicals have more control over such things, and less of an outlet from which to defend their actions by contrasting them against the worse actions of our opponents. Here, hate-mongering is unhelpful at best and at worst could bury us all.